Mark Canton Bites Back At Jim Cameron For Filleting 'Piranha 3D'

A war of words broke out today between Avatar director James Cameron and producer Mark Canton over whether Weinstein Co/Dimension’s current version of Piranha 3D is a crapfest. (Cameron was hired and then fired as the director of the original 1981 Piranha Part 2). Here’s what they are saying:

Cameron told VanityFair.com while publicizing his Avatar re-release: “I tend almost never to throw other films under the bus, but [Piranha 3D] is exactly an example of what we should not be doing in 3D. Because it just cheapens the medium and reminds you of the bad 3D horror films from the ’70s and ’80s, like Friday The 13th 3D. When movies got to the bottom of the barrel of their creativity and at the last gasp of their financial lifespan, they did a 3-D version to get the last few drops of blood out of the turnip. And that’s now what’s happening now with 3D. It is a renaissance. Right now the biggest and best films are being made in 3D. Martin Scorsese is making a film in 3D [Hugo Cabret]. Disney’s biggest film of the year — Tron: Legacy — is coming out in 3D. So it’s a whole new ballgame.”

Canton issued this rebuttal via Dimension’s PR department: “As a producer in the entertainment industry, Jim Cameron’s comments on VanityFair.com are very disappointing to me and the team that made Piranha 3D. Mr. Cameron, who singles himself out to be a visionary of movie-making, seems to have a small vision regarding any motion pictures that are not his own. It is amazing that in the movie-making process – which is certainly a team sport – that Cameron consistently celebrates himself out as though he is a team of one. His comments are ridiculous, self-serving and insulting to those of us who are not caught up in serving his ego and his rhetoric.

Jim, are you kidding or what? First of all, let’s start by you accepting the fact that you were the original director of Piranha 2 and you were fired. Shame on you for thinking that genre movies and the real maestros like Roger Corman and his collaborators are any less auteur or impactful in the history of cinema than you. Martin Scorcese made Boxcar Bertha at the beginning of his career. And Francis Ford Coppola made Dimentia 13 back in 1963. And those are just a few examples of the talented and successful filmmakers whose roots are in genre films. Who are you to impugn any genre film or its creators?

Having been deeply involved, as either an executive or as a producer, on Tim Burton’s original Batman and the first Men In Black, as well as 300, and now Immortals, one of the things that has been consistent about all of the filmmakers involved in these landscape-changing global films is that, in each and every case, all of the directors were humbled by their predecessors, their colleagues and by their awareness of the great history of film that came before them. The enjoyment and the immersion of an audience in a movie theatre, as they had and will have with the above-mentioned films, and as audiences are experiencing with Piranha 3D now, comes from the originality and the vision of the filmmaker, and not just from the creation of the technology. You as much as anyone certainly knows that there are many pieces to the puzzle. Going to the movies still remains, arguably, amongst the best communal experiences that human beings can share.

My sense is that Mr. Cameron has never seen Piranha 3D… certainly not in a movie theatre with a real audience. Jim, we invite you to take that opportunity and experience the movie in a theatre full of fans – fans for whom this movie was always intended to entertain. Does Mr. Cameron have no idea of the painstaking efforts made by the talented young filmmaker Alex Aja and his team of collaborators? Clearly, and this one is a good bet, he has no clue as to how great and how much of a fun-filled experience the audiences who have seen the film in 3D have enjoyed. Those of us who have tried to stay in touch with the common movie audiences – the ones who really matter, the ones who actually still go to the theatre, put on the glasses, and eat the popcorn – take joy and pride in the fact that movies of all kinds, including Piranha 3D, have a place in filmmaking history – past, present and future. 3D unto itself is not a genre Jim, it is a tool that gives audiences an enhanced experience as they experience all kinds of movies. I believe Mr. Cameron did not see Piranha 3D either with any real audience or not at all. On opening weekend, I was in a Los Angeles theatre with a number of today’s great film makers including JJ Abrams, who actually had nothing short of the fabulous, fun 3D experience that the movie provides. I am fortunate enough to have worked on, and continue to work on, evolutionary movies in all formats from just simple good story telling, which still matters most of all, to CG movies to tent-pole size 3D movies, and genre 3D movies like Piranha 3D. What it comes down to, Jim, is – that like most things in life – size doesn’t really matter. Not everyone has the advantage of having endless amounts of money to play in their sandbox and to take ten years using other people’s money to make and market a film….like you do. Why can’t you just count your blessings?

Why do you have to drop Marty Scorsese’s or Tim Burton’s names, both gentlemen who I have personally worked with, and who have enjoyed great joy and success with movies of all genres and sizes well before the advent of modern 3D? Then as now, they were like kids in a candy store recognizing, far beyond your imagination, the possibilities of storytelling and originality. For the record, before you just totally dismiss Piranha 3D and all, in your opinion, worthless genre movies that actually undoubtedly gave you the ability to start your career, you should know that Piranha 3D had an 82% “fresh” (positive) ratting on Rotten Tomatoes on opening day – a web site that all the studios, filmmakers and the public use as a barometer of what makes a quality film.

We know that Piranha 3D has not achieved a boxoffice that is on the level of many of Mr. Cameron’s successes. To date, Piranha 3D has earned over $30 million around the globe with #1 openings in several countries. And, as the “fresh” rating on Rotten Tomatoes indicates, critics and many, many others have embraced and celebrated Piranha 3D for the fun and entertaining – and even smart – movie-going experience that it is. Let’s just keep this in mind Jim….you did not invent 3D. You were fortunate that others inspired you to take it further. The simple truth is that I had nothing but good things to say about Avatar and my own experience since I actually saw it and didn’t damn someone else’s talent publicly in order to disassociate myself from my origins in the business from which we are all very fortunate. To be honest, I found the 3D in Avatar to be inconsistent and while ground breaking in many respects, sometimes I thought it overwhelmed the storytelling. Technology aside, I wish Avatar had been more original in its storytelling.

We have to inspire, teach and mentor this next generation of filmmakers. It is garbage to suggest that any film or any filmmaker who cannot afford to work to your standards should be dissuaded from following his or her craft by not making 3D movies or not making movies like District 9, for example, which probably cost the amount of Avatar’s craft services budget, but totally rocked it in the movie theatre and in the marketplace. In that case, it was not a 3D movie. But had it been, it certainly would not have been any less original or impactful. The enormous worldwide success of Avatar has been good in all respects for you, your financiers, your distributors and the industry, as well as for the movie going public. Jim, there is a difference between Maestro which is a word that garners respect, and Dictator or Critic which are words better left for others who are not in our mutual boat or on our team. You are one of the best, it is reasonable to think that you should dig deeper and behave like it. Young directors should be inspired by you, not publicly castigated by your mean-spirited and flawed analysis.

While we are all awed by your talents and your box office successes – and I compliment you on all of them – why don’t you rethink how you address films with which you are not involved? You should be taking the high road that is being travelled by so many of your peers, and pulling with them to ensure that we, as an industry, will have a continuum of talented filmmakers that will deliver a myriad of motion pictures both big and small, with 3D or any other technologies yet to come that will entertain audiences throughout the world. That is the challenge that we face. That is the future that we should deliver. Please go see Piranha in a theater near you.”

152 Comments

I know Cameron has an ego, but all I read of that long-winded retort is “WAAAA!!! GO SEE PIRANHA-3D WAAAA!!”

Raygunner • on Aug 31, 2010 2:57 pm

Let them fight it out in a round steel cage…film it in Digital 3D and… release it on IMAX!!

CAMERON VS. CANTON

JohnDoe • on Aug 31, 2010 4:39 pm

Let me get this straight: a guy who produces a movie about killer fish, tits, and ass called Piranha, released his movie in poor 3D on the wave of Avatar’s success, and he’s calling Cameron un-original? Holy jumping fucking shitballs, that’s rich.

patti • on Sep 1, 2010 11:48 am

You’re absolutely right. Plus, somebody needs to tell the long-winded whiner Cameron that you can’t get ANY blood out of turnip, much less the “last few drops.” He should sit down and STFU.

lukeandlaura • on Aug 31, 2010 2:20 pm

Cameron cheapens script writing.

Unobtainium? Please.

I agree that Cameron is amazing and forward thinking filmmaker- but he should shut his mouth when it comes to other people’s movies. There is room for all sorts of entertainment.

Jared Wynn • on Aug 31, 2010 2:50 pm

C’mon, Unobtainium was brilliant. It’s unobtainable, get it? That’s some pretty deep subtext, there was nothing like it in Piranha 3-D.

by Mr. Awesome Handsome Smart Man • on Aug 31, 2010 4:59 pm

“Unobtainium” is pretty dumb and clunky, but still not as dumb and clunky as a bad French woman named “Mal” and a maze solver named “Ariadne.”

This isn’t even subtext, it’s filmmakers not knowing when they’re just being stupidly literal and are talking down to their audience.

gurv • on Aug 31, 2010 6:26 pm

Yeah, Christopher Nolan did a pretty lame job in Piranha 3d when he named the French woman “Mal” and he… wait, we are still talking about Piranha 3d, right? And not going off on some irrelevant unrelated tangent (of course, not… that would be ADD and stupid), right?

Git a life, Gurv • on Sep 1, 2010 6:13 am

Name. Gurv. Must. Enforce. Internet. Message. Board. Discipline.

AAARRRGGGHHH!!!!!

Ivy • on Aug 31, 2010 8:01 pm

Nothing subtextual about it, actually. It couldn’t be more literal if it tried…

Real Genius • on Aug 31, 2010 3:32 pm

Dude, “Unobtanium” is a term that the scientific community actually uses. Seriously. Look it up. I love how everyone laughs at it because they just don’t understand.

DownwardTrajectory • on Aug 31, 2010 4:31 pm

I love how you love how everyone laughs. Because you think they don’t understand that the shitty movie is using a for-realsies term. So you think they’re dumb. Because you think you know more. But you’re actually dumber. “Unobtainium” is a term… but it’s a general description of a concept, not an actual thing. So the movie using it in the way it did will be looked at by future generations as laughable. It’s like a film having a character named “deus ex machina” or “ingenue”. James Cameron lost his way long ago. Avatar is a ride, not a film.

Goddamnit.

Z • on Sep 1, 2010 10:48 am

I thought Cameron using “unobtainium” was simply his way of saying, “Hey, don’t take this script too seriously – just enjoy yourself”

But, in Cameron’s film, it makes it sound silly. He doesn’t provide the context of why scientists use that name. So, EITHER – he expects everyone to know that OR they’ve actually named it that as a nod to the term.

Either way, it just sticks out. And when I see him, I’m going to punch him in the nose.

I won’t. He’s probably tough.

(BTW – I laugh at things I don’t understand.)

hobbled • on Aug 31, 2010 8:12 pm

Actually, I thought it was a tip of the hat to “Upsidaisium” which was the term used in a Rocky And Bullwinkle episode for a mineral with the same properties.

In that episode, if I recall, there was also a floating mountain full of the mineral. Er . . . element. Whatever.

Just a general question about unobtanium… not directed at you personally. If unobtanium is so unobtainable, how come it sells by the “kilo”?

Clinker • on Sep 1, 2010 1:40 am

“Unobtainium” is a term that’s been used for years to describe the metal that hard-to-find British and Italian car parts must be made of. Include those other applications of the word, and the whole thing begins to stink of cliche.

Red • on Aug 31, 2010 3:38 pm

“Unobtainium” is a humorous term used mainly in the aerospace industry. It describes a material that is perfect for an application, but does not exist, is extremely expensive, or violates the laws of physics. Its chemical symbol is Uo. “Unobtainium” is also a general concept term used by sci-fi enthusiasts for any fictional substance that is needed to build a certain device that is crucial to the plot of a sci-fi story. “Unobtainium” is featured in the movie The Core (2003), where the earth-boring vessel called the “Virgil” has a hull made from unobtainium to help it withstand the massive pressures inside the Earth’s core. “Unobtainium” is also an anti-gravity element in the online multi-player video game “Skyrates.”

C4x • on Aug 31, 2010 3:41 pm

Agreed, but I’d say that he cheapens storytelling as a whole, forsaking all else for spectacle.

• on Aug 31, 2010 9:07 pm

Amen

Liftyourgame • on Sep 1, 2010 9:56 am

Amen.

And let’s not even talk about the Na’vi having bones ‘reinforced with naturally-occurring carbon fiber’.

patti • on Sep 1, 2010 11:51 am

Cameron cheapens most anything he touches. He’s a whiny, petulant, man-brat who can’t bear to see anyone do well. Just ask any of his ex-wives.

Tom P • on Aug 31, 2010 2:24 pm

Mark Canton is my hero of the day. Slam Dunk. And he was still polite about AVATAR’s storytelling, given it is simply POCAHONTAS in super 3D.

• on Sep 1, 2010 4:20 am

Thats right…He should know better and offer constructive criticism instead of outrightly bashing a film from a young film maker who should be looking to people like him for inspiration and guidance…Very dissapointed in Jim Cameron…

VanDammit • on Aug 31, 2010 2:25 pm

Stop crying. Cameron was talking about how crappy the 2D to 3D post conversion was and how it should have been shot in 3D in the first place. Having seen the movie, and as a fan of Aja, I concur. The 3D is terrible. From the opening scene on the boat with Richard Dreyfuss’s shoulder both seemingly in the background and foreground planes at the same time — to the strange forehead of Steve McQueen Jr as it leaps out three feet in front of his cheek bone.

Suck it up. The movie was fun but your 3D was crap. You didn’t understand the technology then and judging be your comments still don’t understand the technology now.

And Mr. Aja, I’m a fan. Keep up the good work. Next time shoot in 3D.

V

dertike • on Aug 31, 2010 2:43 pm

piranha 3d is one of those rare movies that shot in 3d. unlike alice, that mentsioned cameron.

disgruntled viewer • on Aug 31, 2010 4:33 pm

Piranha was shot in 2D and converted to 3D. got to get your facts in order.

Dr. Malcolm • on Aug 31, 2010 3:08 pm

Well articulated. Reminds me of Jeff Goldblum’s quote in Jurassic Park, “your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.”

someone who knows... • on Aug 31, 2010 8:59 pm

Actually, Mr. Know-it-All, they were going to shoot it in 3D, but due to Aja’s incapability as a Director, and the difficulty of shooting underwater in 110 degree heat with a two camera 3D set-up, it was the Post Production Team who decided BEFORE the film was shot (& way before Avatar was ever released)- that they would do a 3D conversion in post. After shopping it to no less than 5 post production facilities who couldn’t get the job done, they went with InnerD, who did a damn fine job of cleaning up everyone else’s mess!!! It’s the most eye popping 3D you’ll ever see, BECAUSE IT’S SUPPOSED TO BE!!! That was the point! Those of you who think this film was shot with so many obvious 3D moments, but then converted as an “afterthought” are morons. Just because Clash of the Titans did it to save their film doesn’t mean everyone else did.

Losers…

But then again, just b/c it was intentional doesn’t mean Alex Aja isn’t a prick. Because he is.

And the movie still sucked.

You Heard It Hear First Folks!

Shelly • on Sep 1, 2010 10:51 am

Heard it HEAR? Is that supposed to be a pun, or something?

3 double-D's • on Sep 2, 2010 1:01 pm

Sounds like they should have used the Mantello Bros to do the underwater 3D.

AreYouInsane?! • on Sep 1, 2010 11:33 am

VanDammit,

What movie did YOU see? I saw the BEST example of 2d to 3d post-conversion done to date! Is it perfect, no, but it’s 10x better than those craptastic Airbender and Titans conversions, and those were $100 million films! P3D was $24 million, so that makes the conversion a friggin MIRACLE in comparison.

And Jim didn’t mention post conversion, etc. You are reading that in for whatever reason I can’t guess. So stop putting words in his mouth.

Since Jim hasn’t clearly seen the movie, the only thing he can REALLY be talking about is the “3d as a gimmick in cheap horror films” trope. And since that was CLEARLY what P3D was all about, from conception to delivery, I think he just clearly missed the point.

So kudos to Mr. Canton on this round. Jim is being elitist and without even having seen the movie.

Drei • on Oct 20, 2010 1:53 am

Aja couldnt shoot in 3D because you cant properly shoot under water yet with a 3D camera. as simple as that

Steve • on Aug 31, 2010 2:26 pm

I have to say that the 3D in AVATAR made the story look better than it was; it certainly isn’t a tale that lingers in the memory. Whereas PIRANHA 3D dives straight to the heart of the gimmick and makes the most of it, with manifest glee.

That’s Jim Cameron’s problem; he wants us to treat 3D as high art and ignore its gimmick value. But if it quacks like a duck…

Prior • on Aug 31, 2010 2:29 pm

Canton can cry all he wants, there’s no getting around the fact that the 3D in PIRANHA stinks.

AreYouInsane?! • on Sep 1, 2010 11:37 am

Stinks? Really?! As I mentioned above, while the 3d wasn’t AVATAR level (how could it be?!), for a movie made for 5% of AVATAR’s total budget, I thought the 2d->3d work on P3D was AMAZING compared to all the other ones that made my eyes and brain bleed earlier this year.

- • on Aug 31, 2010 2:30 pm

Amen!

Tom • on Aug 31, 2010 2:30 pm

Wow…Mark gives good letter especially when he seeks publicity for his film.

Now, we know that Mark communicates the language well, it is too bad he cannot see the emptiness of this letter done for publicity sake to sell tickets to his 3D wonder. Actually, Mark is brighter than this. He knows the letter is ridiculous, but he just wants to hopefully sell another ticket.

This is the same Mark Canton that was thrown out of Kate’s because they actually told him they needed the table he used almost daily as his office for a cash paying customer who would order something to eat…right, Nikki?

Pretty frickin' funny • on Aug 31, 2010 2:32 pm

Ummm…I’ve got to go with Cameron on this one. Besides, Canton will use any excuse to promote himself, which he once again, has ably proven.

Jim (not Cameron) • on Aug 31, 2010 2:33 pm

Excellent response. James Cameron is a good filmmaker who has had great financial success. However, he is certainly no master storyteller like Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, etc.

Fishmango • on Aug 31, 2010 2:33 pm

Awesome, retort! Couldn’t agree more.

Ryan • on Aug 31, 2010 2:33 pm

Wow, what a rant. I dont necessarily agree with Cameron, as I to enjoy a ‘mindless’ genre flick just as much as the next guy. That being said, the point raised that ‘not everyone has billions of dollars/10years to make a film’ will soon be debunked; The point of Cameron’s involvement with the forthcoming Sanctum 3D was to prove to exhibitors and audiences alike that you dont need a multi million dollar budget to produce quality, professional films using the new 3D technology.

ed • on Aug 31, 2010 3:23 pm

you wanna know what I’m really sick of? And this is no offense to Ryan who just used the phase as others do every day ad nauseam. I’m so sick of the phase “THAT BEING SAID.” It has replaced “BOTTOM LINE” and “AT THE END OF THE DAY.”

You already “SAID” it, so why do you have to repeat yourself saying “THAT BEING SAID?” It’s pretentious, repetitious and self serving. Can we please put an end to the phase, “THAT BEING SAID?”

This irritates me more than any badly done 3-D movie.

Filmy McGoer • on Aug 31, 2010 3:51 pm

That being said, I didn’t find its use that annoying, per se.

Ryan • on Aug 31, 2010 4:09 pm

Although I agree with your sentiment, you’re not doing yourself any favors by substituting the word “phase” when you obviously mean “phrase.” Once could be a typo, but 3 times is ridiculous. Next time you criticize someone’s writing, double check your own first.

sosgemini • on Aug 31, 2010 4:36 pm

I think he meant phase as in fad.

—no horse in this race

Someone loving the ownage • on Aug 31, 2010 2:35 pm

O SNAP.

Reading that just made my day.

Fitzie • on Aug 31, 2010 2:36 pm

Uhm, Mark… let’s set aside Cameron’s celebrated ego for one teeny-weenie second and face a small fact. That fact is your movie actually IS a crap-fest. Any film featuring a CG piranha barfing a half-chewed penis at the camera in 3-D is reason alone to qualify it as poo-poo on celluloid. Not to mention the dozen or so other aberrations presented to satify the public’s blood lust, which is why people are going to see it more than once.

No matter how much of a team player you were, you can’t be delusional enough to qualify your movie as anything more or less than a gold-plated sack of shit.

By the way, I thought all that self-conscious gore was hilarious. Can’t wait to download it for free!

BlackJack • on Aug 31, 2010 2:41 pm

You’re a real film fan there, Fitzie, what will illegally downloading other people’s hard work. You, sir, are part of the problem.

BlackJack • on Aug 31, 2010 2:37 pm

On the money. I gotta think Cameron spoke before he thought. It’s unfortunate. Piranha 3D was a fun movie-going experience (as was Avatar). There’s plenty of room out there for all types of movies. While I don’t know Cameron at all, his comments seem to confirm his reputation.

babybruck • on Aug 31, 2010 2:37 pm

To paraphrase Mickey Rourke (with a nod to Eric Roberts)… “Mark Canton is the f*cking man!”

Groucho • on Aug 31, 2010 2:38 pm

Canton spent 1,374 words defending his Piranha 3D. At last, the mystery of what producers really do has been solved – waste space.

The Beard • on Aug 31, 2010 2:38 pm

How about both movies suck? In either format?

Ringo • on Aug 31, 2010 2:39 pm

Less would have been more. That, and you spelled Scorsese’s name wrong.

Theresa Z. • on Aug 31, 2010 2:47 pm

I like Mark Canton’s rebuttal, and I learned some film history as well. I enjoy James Cameron’s films very much but it’s time to play nice and enjoy your success.

Bubba • on Aug 31, 2010 2:47 pm

Could Mr. Canton talk a little more about who he knows and has worked with in Hollywood? He’s a worm who used to run a studio (into the ground) and a producer only because they wanted to settle him out when he was fired. Can’t believe he went to all this trouble to defend Piranha 3D. And people want to know whAts wrong with movie business today. Only thing sadder is that this is considered news.

D.Z. • on Aug 31, 2010 2:47 pm

I don’t think a guy who owes his entire career to plagiarizing Harlan Ellison has a right to trash anyone else’s films.

Chris • on Aug 31, 2010 2:51 pm

Canton, who gives props to Roger Corman should have just replied:

“We have heard what James Cameron says. We ask the buying public to decide on their own. Tickets on sale now. ”

Don’t go long winded. Just laugh it off and accept the deserved flack. It is utter garbage.

Many years ago, Roger Corman told me (and a large audience) that: “everyone got paid, nobody starved, and some people enjoyed it. What more do you want?”

Canton could learn from that attitude rather then a ridiculous retort. Shrug it off and promote sales.

PM • on Aug 31, 2010 2:53 pm

I think Cameron is an egotistical prick, but it’s not mutually exclusive to the fact that he’s an awesome filmmaker. Mark’s letter rambles and is all over the place – he could have easily said what he needed to in the same amount of words as Cameron used to criticize Piranha. What this leads me to conclude, along with many other readers here, was that he used this opportunity to sell more tickets instead of engage in the topic that Cameron was discussing.

However, Cameron should also shut up if he’s discussing “bottom of the barrel” 3D tactics. Re-releasing Avatar in theatres with unnecessary added footage to draw audiences to spend more of their hard-earned bucks on a film they’ve already seen is also “bottom of barrel” avarice. Glass house, Cameron?

Additup • on Aug 31, 2010 8:14 pm

Probably more like Fox released Avatar again ’cause it NEEDS THE MONEY after the summer of flops!

Total production and marketing budgets by Fox’s own admission is 600 MILLION.

Yeah….they needed to release Avatar again.

Snowman • on Sep 1, 2010 12:28 pm

THE A-TEAM has a total of 167 million?

Worldwide?

Uhmmmm….

OUCH!!

Mat • on Aug 31, 2010 2:55 pm

One part of me feels that this is a nice, intelligent, and well thought out response that people should read and absorb

the other part of me feels that James Cameron should buy this jagoffs house, burn it down, and pee on the ashes

JohnDoe • on Aug 31, 2010 4:43 pm

Pretty much my sentiments exactly. This guy wants to take on quite possibly the most powerful filmmaker in Hollywood? Go for it, Cameron could end his career in a heartbeat. If Canton has what you would call, a “career” that is.